Scrap copper

keystone

Steve_xx wrote: »

The possibility that the scrap may or may not be worth £700 is not relevant to the OP's claim.

Agree entirely but its completely relevant to some of the posts on here - "deuct £700 from his bill", "take him to the small claims court" (which doesn't exist of course - its the small claims process in the County Court)

A contractor was employed to do some work.

Correct.

The OP instructed that contractor not to remove the spoils, but he did.

The OP claims to have done so. We do not know whether the contractor accepted that instruction or whether he misheard or misunderstood.

The contractor removed the spoils without permission and therefore it is theft.

No you cannot accuse the man of theft based on hearsay. Once again this site is not a star chamber. It might be a case of theft but there is no concrete evidence to prove the charge and to continually parrot "therefore it is theft" is wholly unjustified and tantamount to defamation.

Neither you nor I know what was said between the two parties.

Agree 100%

We can only go on what the OP says.

and without further information to the contrary we cannot form a rational and clear conclusion,. Whatever happened to presumed innocence or have we as a nation progressed to presumed guilt. Sentence first, verdict afterwards?

Incidentally the OP has not posted any further comment so we can assume that he has decided not to take this further or has settled the matter satisfactorily but not posted the result here.

Agree.

It is not unknown for workmen, left to their own devices, to help themselves to that which is not theirs.

That cheapens the discussion somewhat and suggests you have a personal agenda or at the very least an axe to grind. If it is to descend to base levels I will grow tired of it TBH.

Cheers

keystone

heating-eng wrote: »

most if not all the customers i have worked expect me to get rid of the rubbish and scrap for them.
the cost of this is included when i quote. the price would be more if there was no scrap so on my jobs the scrap is mine.

There is nothing wrong with this approach. The lesson is that you are clear and upfront about it. If such things are written in the contract there can be no argument.

so in my mind it is not theft

Agree based on data currently provided.

£700 scrap from one job is very unlikey in my opinion,

Buck House?

there fore i would not trust the rest of what has been said, sounds like a customer trying to get every last penny from the installer to me.

We certainly do not have the whole story.


Cheers

keystone

Steve_xx wrote: »

One would therefore assume that at that point that the installer would have the option to say that the job had been priced inclusive of the scrap value.

and you do not know that he didn't.

I find it interesting that the £700 number seems to have come about well into the job otherwise there would be b....r all to look at and guess a number. So do we possibly see a situation where the OP (on hearing this music to his ears) has suddenly changed the goalposts on the contractor they having previously discussed that the scrap value is costed in? In those circumstances it could be argued that the OP has deprived the contractor of an element of his remuneration. Would that be theft? Yes I know we don't know but I'm only speculating, of course.

Cheers

panchenlama

anyone else think this story is being made up? The responses from namid seem really odd i.e. bit more info each time that is fundemental in nature....

Steve_xx

keystone wrote: »

and you do not know that he didn't.

I find it interesting that the £700 number seems to have come about well into the job otherwise there would be b....r all to look at and guess a number. So do we possibly see a situation where the OP (on hearing this music to his ears) has suddenly changed the goalposts on the contractor they having previously discussed that the scrap value is costed in? In those circumstances it could be argued that the OP has deprived the contractor of an element of his remuneration. Would that be theft? Yes I know we don't know but I'm only speculating, of course.

Cheers

Yes, exactly, you are speculating, as are the rest of us. Your views are as valid as anyone elses. I don't happen to concur with them.

keystone

Steve_xx wrote: »

Yes, exactly, you are speculating, as are the rest of us. Your views are as valid as anyone elses. I don't happen to concur with them.

Excellent thank you - we got there in the end. So its theft in your opinion rather than theft as a statement of absolute fact which is what has been coming over from your posts up 'til now and is a totally different matter. I'm OK with that - you are as entitled to your opinion as the next man.

Bon chance.

Cheers

Steve_xx

keystone wrote: »

Excellent thank you - we got there in the end. So its theft in your opinion rather than theft as a statement of absolute fact which is what has been coming over from your posts up 'til now and is a totally different matter. I'm OK with that - you are as entitled to your opinion as the next man.

Bon chance.

Cheers

If the OP instructed the contractor not to take the scrap, and he subsequently did take it; then it constitutes a theft.

It is theft based on what the OP has told us, not on what my opinion is.

If the OP has not disclosed some part of the conversation here then it may look different. I am discussing what is disclosed rather than speculating on what may not have been disclosed.

keystone

"If" is such a big word isn't it?

Cheers

Steve_xx

keystone wrote: »

"If" is such a big word isn't it?

Cheers

No, "if" is a small word, with many possibilities.

keystone

Steve_xx wrote: »

No, "if" is a small word, with many possibilities.

:rotfl::rotfl:Very good. LoL. You know what I meant.

Cheers